Oral Tranexemic Acid With Triple Combination Cream (Flucinolone+Hydroquinone+Tretinoin) Versus Triple Combination Cream Alone In Treatment Of Melasma.

BACKGROUND: Melasma is an acquired cutaneous disorder characterized by hyperpigmentation of the face predominantly affecting the areas exposed to direct sun light. The triple combination cream, i.e., a mid-potency corticosteroid (Fluocinolone acetonide 0.01%), a retinoid (Tretinoin 0.05%), and Hydroquinone 4% is one of the widely used topical medicament for melasma treatment world over. Tranexamic acid is another agent found to be effective in melasma treatment when used topically, intra-lesionally or orally. This study has been conducted to compare mean decrease in Melasma Area Severity Index (MASI) score when tranexamic acid is combined with triple combination cream versus triple combination cream alone for melasma treatment. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary care hospital of Pakistan. Sixty-three patients of melasma who met the inclusion criteria and gave written informed consent for the study were enrolled. These patients were randomly divided into 2 treatment groups. Group A was given triple combination cream and oral tranxemic acid while Group B was given triple combination cream for duration of 8 weeks. Severity of melasma was assessed by MASI, which was calculated at baseline and at the end of week 8. Mean decrease in MASI score was calculated in both groups and statistically analysed employing SPSS 20. RESULTS: Sixty patients, 30 in both groups, completed the study. Study participants were predominantly female (81.67%), with mean age of 30.46±6.24 years in group A while 31.90±4.53 in group B. No statistically significant difference was noted in both treatment groups for mean decrease in the MASI score (6.4933±4.38358 in group A compared to 5.7833±5.04251 in the group B; p-value 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of oral tranexamic acid did not contribute significantly in decrease in MASI score when used in combination with topical triple regimen. It may have a role as an adjuvant to topical triple combination cream.

Microneedling with Drug Delivery (Hydroquinone 4% Serum) as an Adjuvant Therapy for Recalcitrant Melasma.

A 42-year-old woman with phototype V, presented a 9-year history of refractory centrofacial melasma to topical bleaching agents and peelings, untreated for the last 90 days. One session of microneedling with 1.5 mm needles was performed with hydroquinone 4% sterile serum drug delivery; after 3 days, modified Kligman's formula (hydroquinone 4% + fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% + tretinoin 0.05%) and broad-spectrum sunscreen SPF 70 were introduced for daily use. After 30 days, a significant improvement was observed in the clinical outcome (Figure 1) and the quality of life of the patient. These parameters were measured using Melasma Area and Severity Index (MASI) scale, with an 82.5% decrease, and Melasma Quality of Life Scale - Brazilian Population (MELASQoL-BP), with a 60% decrease. Dermatoscopic analysis (polarized videodermatoscopy x20) of the glabellar region revealed lighting of the pseudoreticular pigment network, diffuse light to dark brown background, and reduction in vascularity and telangiectasias (Figure 2). At the 5-month follow-up, there had been no relapse. The patient continued to use a broad-spectrum sunscreen along with the topical regiment.

Fluocinolone Acetonide Intravitreal Implant for Treating Recurrent Non-infectious Uveitis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited Alimera Sciences, the company manufacturing fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant (FAc) 0.19 mg (tradename ILUVIEN®), to submit evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of FAc for treating recurrent non-infectious uveitis. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre + , was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This paper contains a summary of the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence submitted by the company, the ERG's critique on the submitted evidence, and the guidance issued by the NICE Appraisal Committee (AC). The company submission (CS) was mainly informed by the PSV-FAI-001 trial in which FAc was compared with (limited) current practice [(L)CP], which was not considered to be representative of UK clinical practice by the ERG. There was no comparison of FAc to any treatment listed in the final scope, and especially to the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (dexamethasone), which was considered to be a relevant comparator by the AC. The primary outcome of the PSV-FAI-001 was recurrence of uveitis in the treated eye. Most of the events for the primary outcome were imputed during the PSV-FAI-001 trial, which probably led to an overestimation of the number of recurrences of disease, and a biased estimate of the relative effectiveness of FAc versus (L)CP. Finally, the place of FAc in the treatment pathway was not clearly defined by the company. Substantial uncertainty surrounded the cost-effectiveness results due to the shortcomings of the clinical evidence. Additionally, the quality of life of patients was not measured during the PSV-FAI-001 trial and long-term effectiveness data of FAc were lacking. The ERG adjusted several issues identified in the CS and added dexamethasone as a comparator in the decision analytic model. The ERG presented multiple analyses as base-cases because several elements of the assessment remained uncertain. The fully incremental ERG results ranged from dexamethasone (extendedly) dominating FAc (when assuming a hazard ratio of 1 or 0.7 for dexamethasone versus FAc) to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £30,153 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for FAc versus (L)CP [when assuming a hazard ratio of 0.456 for dexamethasone versus (L)CP]. The ICER of FAc versus (L)CP ranged from £12,325 to £30,153 per QALY gained. After a second AC meeting where alternative company scenarios comparing FAc with dexamethasone were considered by the AC, the AC concluded that "the results of the company's analyses ranged from the fluocinolone acetonide implant being dominant (that is, it was more effective and costs less), to an ICER of £29,461 per QALY gained, and most of the ICERs were below £20,000 per QALY gained". Therefore, the AC recommended FAc as a cost-effective use of National Health Service (NHS) resources for treating recurrent non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye in the final TA590 guidance (published July 2019).

ILUVIEN® technology in the treatment of center-involving diabetic macular edema: a review of the literature.

Diabetic macular edema (DME) is one of the major causes of blindness, caused primarily by hyperglycemia and results from multiple pathological processes mostly secondary to increased levels of VEGF and other inflammatory cytokines. DME management includes control of systemic risk factors together with laser photocoagulation, frequent intraocular injections of anti-VEGF agents and steroids implants. Recent adoption of novel alternative drug delivery options has led to the development of sustained release ocular implants with longer duration of action with less injection frequency. This article will review the pharmacology and clinical data in terms of efficacy, safety and benefits of the sustained release steroid implants in treatment of DME with special emphasis on the fluocinolone acetonide ILUVIEN® implant.

Association Between Long-Lasting Intravitreous Fluocinolone Acetonide Implant vs Systemic Anti-inflammatory Therapy and Visual Acuity at 7 Years Among Patients With Intermediate, Posterior, or Panuveitis.

IMPORTANCE: A randomized clinical trial comparing fluocinolone acetonide implant vs systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppression for treatment of severe noninfectious intermediate, posterior, and panuveitides did not result in a significant difference in visual acuity at 2 and 4.5 years; longer-term outcomes are not known. OBJECTIVE: To compare the association between intravitreous fluocinolone acetonide implant vs systemic therapy and long-term visual and other outcomes in patients with uveitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Nonprespecified 7-year observational follow-up of the Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment (MUST) randomized clinical trial comparing the alternative treatments. Follow-up was conducted in tertiary uveitis subspecialty practices in the United States (21), the United Kingdom (1), and Australia (1). Of 255 patients 13 years or older with intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis (active within ≤60 days) enrolled in the MUST trial between December 6, 2005, and December 9, 2008, 215 consented to ongoing follow-up through at least 7 years postrandomization (last visit, February 10, 2016). INTERVENTIONS: Participants had been randomized to receive a surgically placed intravitreous fluocinolone acetonide implant or systemic corticosteroids supplemented by immunosuppression. When both eyes required treatment, both eyes were treated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity in uveitic eyes (5 letters = 1 visual acuity chart line; potential range of change in letters read, -121 to +101; minimal clinically important difference, 7 letters), analyzed by treatment assignment accounting for nonindependence of eyes when patients had 2 uveitic eyes. Secondary outcomes included potential systemic toxicities of corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapy and death. RESULTS: Seven-year data were obtained for 161 uveitic eyes (70% of 90 patients assigned to implant) and 167 uveitic eyes (71% of 90 patients assigned to systemic therapy) (77% female; median age at enrollment, 48 [interquartile range, 36-56] years). Change in mean visual acuity from baseline (implant, 61.7; systemic therapy, 65.0) through 7 years (implant, 55.8; systemic therapy, 66.2) favored systemic therapy by 7.2 (95% CI, 2.1-12) letters. Among protocol-specified, prospectively collected systemic adverse outcomes, the cumulative 7-year incidence in the implant and systemic therapy groups, respectively, was less than 10%, with the exceptions of hyperlipidemia (6.1% vs 11.2%), hypertension (9.8% vs 18.4%), osteopenia (41.5% vs 43.1%), fractures (11.3% vs 18.6%), hospitalization (47.6% vs 42.3%), and antibiotic-treated infection (57.4% vs 72.3%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In 7-year extended follow-up of a randomized trial of patients with severe intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis, those randomized to receive systemic therapy had better visual acuity than those randomized to receive intravitreous fluocinolone acetonide implants. Study interpretation is limited by loss to follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00132691.

Quantitative Assessment of Optic Nerve Changes in Patients With Diabetic Macular Edema Treated With Fluocinolone Acetonide Vitreous Implants.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glaucomatous changes in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) treated with intravitreal implants releasing 0.2 µg/day or 0.5 µg/day fluocinolone acetonide (FAc) (Iluvien 0.2 µg/day; Alimera Sciences, Alpharetta, GA) or sham control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fundus photographs were assessed to determine clinically significant changes in glaucomatous indicators. RESULTS: The mean cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) change was similar with all three treatments. Compared with sham control, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with 0.5 µg/day but not 0.2 µg/day FAc experienced a CDR increase of greater than 0.1. There was no significant increase in the proportion of patients experiencing a CDR increase of greater than 0.2 with either dose of implant versus sham control. Other indicators of glaucomatous change did not differ significantly with treatment. Subgroup analyses showed no differences in cupping based on ocular or baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Treatment with FAc for 36 months was not associated with significant glaucomatous optic nerve head changes in patients with DME with or without increased intraocular pressure. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2016;47:418-425.].

Ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide versus ciprofloxacin alone in the treatment of diffuse otitis externa.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide (antibiotic plus corticosteroid) ear drops compared to ciprofloxacin (antibiotic) ear drops in diffuse otitis externa. METHODS: This was a multicentre, randomised, parallel-group, double-blind study involving 590 patients of both sexes aged 7 years or older. RESULTS: The rate of clinical cure was higher (p = 0.01) with ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide than with ciprofloxacin alone. The mean total symptom score was lower with ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide (p = 0.005). No differences were found in the percentage of patients reporting resolution of otalgia between patients receiving ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide and patients receiving only ciprofloxacin. Resolution of oedema and otorrhoea (p = 0.003 and p = 0.002, respectively) was higher with ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide, as was eradication or presumed eradication (p = 0.003). There were eight mild adverse events, three with the ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide combination (not related to the treatment) and five when ciprofloxacin was administered alone (directly related to the treatment). CONCLUSIONS: Ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide is a more effective treatment for diffuse otitis externa than ciprofloxacin alone. The ciprofloxacin plus fluocinolone acetonide combination also has an excellent safety profile.

Carbamazepine-induced DRESS syndrome in a child: rapid response to pulsed corticosteroids.

DRESS syndrome is an idiosyncratic reaction to drugs, which can occur in both adults and children. To date there is no agreed upon criteria for its diagnosis; there is even less consensus on its management. We report the case of a 14- year-old boy with carbamazepine induced DRESS syndrome, predominantly involving the liver. He responded rapidly to high dose pulsed intravenous corticosteroids.

Single-session intense pulsed light combined with stable fixed-dose triple combination topical therapy for the treatment of refractory melasma.

The effectiveness of intense pulsed light (IPL) has been reported in adults with melasma, but there is little information about IPL with triple combination topical therapy (TC) and refractory melasma. Sixty-two patients with totally or partially refractory melasma were enrolled in this randomized open-label study. Thirty-one patients were treated with IPL in a single session, bleaching agents and broad-spectrum sunscreens. Thirty-one patients were in the control group, receiving only bleaching agents and broad-spectrum sunscreens. The Melasma Area and Severity Index (MASI) and the investigator's global assessment using a seven-point scale were used to determine the impact and effectiveness of the treatment. The IPL group results based on MASI showed a 49.4% reduction (from 17.6 to 8.9; p < 0.001) after six months and a 44.9% reduction after 12 months (from 17.6 to 9.7; p < 0.001). The investigator's global assessment showed that the difference in the improvement rate between the IPL group and control group was significant (p = 0.002), with a better response in the IPL group. Single session IPL combined with stable fixed-dose triple combination treatment is a safe and effective treatment for refractory mixed and dermal melasma.

Combined posterior chamber intraocular lens, vitrectomy, Retisert, and pars plana tube in noninfectious uveitis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of combined cataract extraction, posterior chamber intraocular lens placement, pars plana vitrectomy, fluocinolone acetonide intravitreal implant (Retisert), and Ahmed valves with pars plana tube (CPR-PT) in eyes with chronic, posterior, noninfectious uveitis. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients who underwent CPR-PT. Outcome measures included visual acuity, intraocular pressure, inflammation, and complications. RESULTS: Eight eyes were included, with a mean follow-up of 18 months. Mean visual acuity improved from 1.89 to 0.14 logMAR (Snellen, counting fingers at 2 ft [0.6 m]) to 20/30; P=.01). Mean intraocular pressure remained stable at 16 to 17 mm Hg (P=.35). The number of glaucoma medications per eye decreased from 2.9 to 0.25 (P=.01). Systemic prednisone therapy was discontinued in all patients by 9 months postoperatively. Inflammation was well controlled in all eyes. CONCLUSION: The CPR-PT procedure allows rapid visual rehabilitation without major short-term complications.

Randomized comparison of systemic anti-inflammatory therapy versus fluocinolone acetonide implant for intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis: the multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids plus immunosuppression when indicated (systemic therapy) versus fluocinolone acetonide implant (implant therapy) for noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis (uveitis). DESIGN: Randomized controlled parallel superiority trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with active or recently active uveitis. METHODS: Participants were randomized (allocation ratio 1:1) to systemic or implant therapy at 23 centers (3 countries). Implant-assigned participants with bilateral uveitis were assigned to have each eye that warranted study treatment implanted. Treatment-outcome associations were analyzed by assigned treatment for all eyes with uveitis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Masked examiners measured the primary outcome: change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported quality of life, ophthalmologist-graded uveitis activity, and local and systemic complications of uveitis or therapy. Reading Center graders and glaucoma specialists assessing ocular complications were masked. Participants, ophthalmologists, and coordinators were unmasked. RESULTS: On evaluation of changes from baseline to 24 months among 255 patients randomized to implant and systemic therapy (479 eyes with uveitis), the implant and systemic therapy groups had an improvement in visual acuity of +6.0 and +3.2 letters (P = 0.16, 95% confidence interval on difference in improvement between groups, -1.2 to +6.7 letters, positive values favoring implant), an improvement in vision-related quality of life of +11.4 and +6.8 units (P = 0.043), a change in EuroQol-EQ5D health utility of +0.02 and -0.02 (P = 0.060), and residual active uveitis in 12% and 29% (P=0.001), respectively. Over the 24 month period, implant-assigned eyes had a higher risk of cataract surgery (80%, hazard ratio [HR] = 3.3, P < 0.0001), treatment for elevated intraocular pressure (61%, HR=4.2, P < 0.0001), and glaucoma (17%, HR=4.2, P = 0.0008). Patients assigned to systemic therapy had more prescription-requiring infections than patients assigned to implant therapy (0.60 vs 0.36/person-year, P=0.034), without notable long-term consequences; systemic adverse outcomes otherwise were unusual in both groups, with minimal differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In each treatment group, mean visual acuity improved over 24 months, with neither approach superior to a degree detectable with the study's power. Therefore, the specific advantages and disadvantages identified should dictate selection between the alternative treatments in consideration of individual patients' particular circumstances. Systemic therapy with aggressive use of corticosteroid-sparing immunosuppression was well tolerated, suggesting that this approach is reasonably safe for local and systemic inflammatory disorders. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Sequential treatment with triple combination cream and intense pulsed light is more efficacious than sequential treatment with an inactive (control) cream and intense pulsed light in patients with moderate to severe melasma.

BACKGROUND: Triple combination (TC) cream is a stable combination of fluocinolone acetonide 0.01%, hydroquinone 4%, and tretinoin 0.05% and is currently the only hydroquinone-containing drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of melasma. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of TC cream when used sequentially with intense pulsed light (IPL) treatments in patients with moderate to severe melasma. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a 10-week, split-face study in which 56 patients with symmetrical melasma lesions were treated with TC cream on one side of the face and an inactive control cream on the other side of the face. Patients also had two IPL treatments at weeks 2 and 6. (Topical treatment was suspended during IPL treatments ± 1 day.) RESULTS: Melasma severity was significantly less with TC cream and IPL than with inactive cream and IPL at weeks 6 (p=.007) and 10 (p=.002). Improvement in melasma was greater with TC cream and IPL than with inactive cream and IPL according to investigator and patient evaluations at weeks 6 and 10 (p<.001 for both time points). Treatment with TC cream and IPL was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that TC cream and IPL treatment is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with melasma.

A histological examination for skin atrophy after 6 months of treatment with fluocinolone acetonide 0.01%, hydroquinone 4%, and tretinoin 0.05% cream.

Melasma is a common disorder affecting a significant percentage of the population, particularly those with skin of color. Therapy with hydroquinone, a depigmenting agent, as a single agent or in combination with other agents has been used with variable success. A triple-combination (TC) cream combining hydroquinone 4% with tretinoin 0.05% and fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% was developed for the treatment of melasma. We studied the use of TC cream for 24 weeks and had tissue samples for all time points in 62 patients with moderate to severe melasma. The atrophogenic potential of TC cream was evaluated through serial histopathologic examination of skin biopsies. No statistically significant histopathologic signs of atrophy of the epidermis or dermis were noted at any time point throughout the study. There was a marked reduction in epidermal melanin in treated subjects; however, we did not observe any significant difference in baseline and treated samples in the amount of perivascular inflammatory infiltrate, dermal mucin, keratinocyte and melanocyte atypia, or mast cells, consistent with findings of previous studies where topical retinoids were used. An increase in the mean number of blood vessels per square millimeter of tissue was observed in 2 study cohorts between baseline and week 24. These results suggest that the risk of skin atrophy with 24-week use of TC cream for the treatment of melasma is very low.

Fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in peanut oil: safety and efficacy data in the treatment of childhood atopic dermatitis in infants as young as 3 months of age.

Fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in a blend of refined peanut and mineral oils has been established as effective and safe treatment for atopic dermatitis in patients 2 years and older, including those with peanut sensitivity, for several years. We sought to study the safety of fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% oil and its potential for adrenal axis suppression in infants as young as 3 months of age. A controlled, open-label study was performed in children aged 3 months to 2 years with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis at two academic pediatric dermatology centers. Patients received topical fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% oil twice daily to affected areas involving a minimum of 20% body surface ratio for 4 weeks. Cortisol stimulation testing was performed at baseline and at the end of the treatment phase. Patients were monitored for medication use and adverse events. Efficacy was assessed using the Investigator Global Severity and Response scales. Thirty-two patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis were recruited into the study and 30 were evaluated with the Physician's Global Improvement Assessment tool. The mean body surface ratio treated for all age groups was 48%. Eighty-three percent of patients had marked or better improvement scores by week 2 and 96% by week 4, with 40% completely cleared. No adrenal suppression occurred in the 24 patients that met inclusion criteria for hypothalamus-pituitary axis (HPA) axis analysis. No relevant adverse events occurred. Results of this study support the safety and efficacy of fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in refined peanut oil vehicle, for infants as young as 3 months of age with atopic dermatitis. No evidence of adrenal suppression or adverse local effects was demonstrated after 4 weeks of twice daily treatment.

Retisert (Bausch & Lomb/Control Delivery Systems).

Retisert (Envision TD), a sustained release intraocular implant containing fluocinolone acetonide, has been developed and launched in the US by Bausch & Lomb and Control Delivery Systems for the treatment of chronic non-infectious uveitis affecting the posterior segment of the eye.

Flunisolide HFA for the treatment of asthma: an old friend reformulated.

The environmental mandate to eliminate the production of ozone-depleting products including chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants has encouraged much needed research into improving modes of delivery of inhaled corticosteroids and enhancing drug deposition. Consequently, flunisolide CFC, an inhaled corticosteroid with a proven track record in the treatment of asthma, has been reformulated using a hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) as a propellant and is now awaiting FDA approval. Flunisolide HFA is a solution aerosol, unlike flunisolide CFC which is a suspension aerosol. As a solution aerosol, flunisolide HFA has a smaller mean particle size than flunisolide CFC. In addition, the built-in spacer included in the flunisolide HFA inhaler acts to reduce ex-actuator particle size; the smaller particle size of flunisolide HFA results in an improved deposition profile. Flunisolide HFA has substantially more lung deposition and much less oropharyngeal deposition than flunisolide CFC. Limited information is currently available on the clinical performance of flunisolide HFA. A single dose-response study has been performed in adults and in children comparing multiple doses of flunisolide HFA and flunisolide CFC. These studies indicate that flunisolide HFA is effective in controlling asthma. No unusual safety concerns have been noted, although further studies are needed to determine the long-term systemic effects of flunisolide HFA.

Fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in peanut oil: therapy for childhood atopic dermatitis, even in patients who are peanut sensitive.

BACKGROUND: Fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in a blend of refined peanut and mineral oils has been used as treatment for scalp psoriasis for several years, but only more recently for atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the effectiveness for atopic dermatitis, potential for adrenal axis suppression, and safety of the fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% in oil in children with atopic dermatitis, including children with atopic dermatitis and peanut allergic sensitivity. METHODS: Three separate studies were performed in children aged 2 to 12 years with atopic dermatitis: multicenter double-blind, randomized, and vehicle-controlled trial; cortisol stimulation testing; and prick testing, patch testing, and monitored medication use in children with peanut allergic sensitivity. RESULTS: Improvement of >/=50% was demonstrated within 2 weeks in 81% to 87% of 81 patients treated with active medication versus 39% of 45 children treated with vehicle oil alone. No adrenal suppression occurred after 4 weeks of therapy in 32 patients. None of 9 patients who were peanut sensitive reacted to either the full formulation or vehicle in prick or patch testing; 20 children who were peanut sensitive showed no allergic reactions after application of the medication. CONCLUSION: Fluocinolone 0.01% in peanut oil is an effective alternative to the use of topical corticosteroid agents in ointment, cream, and lotion forms in children. No evidence of adrenal suppression or adverse local effects were demonstrated in these studies. The medication was well tolerated in patients with peanut allergic sensitivity.

One-year trial on safety and normal linear growth with flunisolide HFA in children with asthma.

Flunisolide hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) has efficacy equivalent to that of flunisolide chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) at one third the dose of the CFC formulation, a reduction from 250 microg/puff for flunisolide CFC to 85 microg/puff for flunisolide HFA. Flunisolide HFA delivers a smaller particle size (1.2 microm) in solution, resulting in improved lung deposition as compared with flunisolide CFC (3.8 microm), which is delivered in suspension. An added built-in spacer has reduced oropharyngeal deposition that may result in fewer adverse events and make it easier to use. The objective of this study was to compare the year-long safety of flunisolide HFA (daily dosage 340 microg) with that of CFC beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) (daily dosage 336 microg) and cromolyn sodium (daily dosage 6,400 microg) in children 4-11 years old with mild-to-moderate asthma. The effects of these drugs on linear growth and growth velocity were also compared. The study was a 1-year open-label, parallel-group trial. Changes in physical examinations (including growth), adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiograms, cosyntropin stimulation tests, mouth and throat cultures for Candida albicans, and laboratory findings were analyzed. Patients 4-5 years old received flunisolide HFA only. In total, 235 children were evaluated (152 receiving flunisolide HFA, 39 BDP, and 44 cromolyn). The incidence of adverse events was comparable among treatment groups; most were mild or moderate and considered unrelated to treatment. Among patients 6-11 years old, mean changes from baseline height at week 52 were 6.2 cm for the flunisolide HFA and cromolyn groups and 5.1 cm for the BDP group. Thus growth in children receiving flunisolide HFA was unaffected by 1 year of treatment. Changes from baseline in other parameters, including response to cosyntropin stimulation, were insignificant and similar among the 3 treatment groups. At the dosages studied, and following 1 year of treatment, flunisolide HFA with its small particle size and built-in spacer is safe and well tolerated in children 4-11 years old. There are no adverse effects associated with hypothalamic pituitary axis (HPA) function of flunisolide HFA, including linear growth in children 6-11 years old when compared with BDP and cromolyn sodium.

Flunisolide HFA.

Flunisolide is a synthetic corticosteroid approved for the treatment of persistent asthma and delivered by means of a metered-dose inhaler (MDI). A new formulation of flunisolide, using hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) as a propellant, has been developed to comply with the mandated worldwide phase-out of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants. Aerosol particle size in the new flunisolide HFA solution is smaller than the flunisolide CFC suspension (1.2 vs 3.8 microm mass median aerodynamic diameter). Aerosol particle size is a key element in determining lung deposition and the regional distribution of inhaled medication within the lung. In addition, the flunisolide HFA MDI has been redesigned to include a built-in spacer. These features have improved distal lung deposition. Flunisolide HFA, at one-third the dosage (170 and 340 microg twice daily), had similar efficacy to flunisolide CFC (500 and 1000 microg twice daily) and significantly greater efficacy than placebo in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week study in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Flunisolide HFA was well tolerated in all trials. A long-term study found no suppression of adrenal function and minimal systemic effects were observed both in adults and children.